Apache Camel Generic Router - pass exchange properties to static class methods - apache-camel

I am trying to create a generic router whose processor and other attributes are populated from a static class. Here is sample code.
public class GenericRouter extends RouteBuilder( {
#Override
public void configure() throws Exception {
from("direct:generic-route")
.process(Util.getProcesss(“${exchangeProperty[processKey]"))
.ToD(Util.getUrl(“${exchangeProperty[urlKey]"));
}
}
Public class Util{
Map<String,Object> routerResources;
static {
//load routerResources
}
public static Processor getProcessor(String processorKey){
return (Processor)routerResources.get(processorKey);
}
public static Processor getUrl(String urlKey){
return (String)routerResources.get(urlKey);
}
}
The generic router is expected to post a rest call. the properties "urlKey" and "processorUrl" are already available in exchange. I finding it difficult to pass exchange properties to static Util class methods.

If you want to access properties of an exchange in plain java you can use .process or .exchange. If you need to access body or headers you can use e.getMessage().getBody() and e.getMessage().getHeader()
from("direct:generic-route")
.process( e -> {
String processKey = e.getProperty("processKey", String.class);
Processor processor = Util.getProcessor(processKey);
processor.process(e);
})
.setProperty("targetURL").exchange( e -> {
String urlKey = e.getProperty("urlKey", String.class);
return Util.getUrl(urlKey);
})
.toD("${exchangeProperty.targetURL}");
Also make sure you fix the return type of this method:
public static Processor getUrl(String urlKey){
return (String)routerResources.get(urlKey);
}
As a side note, you can actually use map stored in body, header or property through simple language.
public class ExampleTest extends CamelTestSupport {
#Test
public void example(){
template.sendBodyAndHeader("direct:example", null, "urlKey", "urlA");
}
#Override
protected RoutesBuilder createRouteBuilder() throws Exception {
return new RouteBuilder() {
#Override
public void configure() throws Exception {
Map<String, String> urlMap = new HashMap<>();
urlMap.put("urlA", "direct:pointA");
urlMap.put("urlB", "direct:pointB");
from("direct:example")
.setProperty("urlMap").constant(urlMap)
.log("url: ${exchangeProperty.urlMap['${headers.urlKey}']}");
}
};
}
}

Related

Unit test Apache Camel specific routes by filtering (Model#setRouteFilter)

How to include only certain routes in my unit test. For example, how do I enable only my-translation-route.
public class TestRoute extends RouteBuilder {
#Override
public void configure() {
from("ftp://my-ftp-server:21/messages")
.routeId("my-inbound-route")
.to("direct:my-translation-route");
from("direct:my-translation-route")
.routeId("my-translation-route")
.bean(MyBean.class)
.to("direct:my-outbound-route");
from ("direct:my-outbound-route")
.routeId("my-translation-route")
.to("http://my-http-server:8080/messages");
}
}
I tried with Model#filterRoutes but this did not work. All routes were loaded.
class TestRouteTest extends CamelTestSupport {
#Override
protected RoutesBuilder createRouteBuilder() {
return new TestRoute();
}
#Override
public boolean isUseAdviceWith() {
return true;
}
#Test
void testIfItWorks() throws Exception {
context.setRouteFilterPattern("my-translation-route", null);
AdviceWith.adviceWith(context, "my-translation-route", a -> {
a.mockEndpointsAndSkip("direct:my-outbound-route");
});
context.start();
getMockEndpoint("mock:direct:my-outbound-route").expectedBodyReceived().expression(constant("Hahaha! 42"));
template.sendBodyAndHeaders("direct:my-translation-route", "42", null);
assertMockEndpointsSatisfied();
}
}
I got it working with the override of CamelTestSupport#getRouteFilterIncludePattern, e.g.:
#Override
public String getRouteFilterIncludePattern() {
return "direct:my-translation-route";
}
But then this is set for all tests in this test class.
Possible (stupid) solution : set a conditional auto startup for your routes, whose value depends on a (Camel or JVM) property that you can set with a particular value during the unit tests:
public class TestRoute extends RouteBuilder {
#PropertyInject(name="productionMode", defaultValue="true")
private boolean productionMode;
#Override
public void configure() {
from("ftp://my-ftp-server:21/messages")
...
.autoStartUp(productionMode); // <=here
}
}
There are various ways to override properties during your tests. See https://camel.apache.org/components/3.17.x/properties-component.html

Camel bean component invokes cached instance of #Named / #Dependent bean

In our application we are using Apache Camel with camel-cdi component in JBoss EAP 7.1 environment. After upgrade of Apache Camel to actual version the application started to behave incorrectly in parallel execution.
I have found, that bean component invokes always the same instance. From my understanding, bean with #Dependent scope should be always fresh instance for every CDI lookup.
I have tried endpoint parameter cache=false, which should be default, but the behavior stays the same. Also tried to specify #Dependent, which should be default too.
Attaching MCVE, which fails on Apache Camel 2.20.0 and newer. Works well with 2.19.5 and older. Full reproducible project on Github.
#ApplicationScoped
#Startup
#ContextName("cdi-context")
public class MainRouteBuilder extends RouteBuilder {
public void configure() throws Exception {
from("timer:test")
.to("bean:someDependentBean?cache=false");
}
}
#Named
//#Dependent //Dependent is default
public class SomeDependentBean implements Processor {
private int numOfInvocations = 0;
private static Logger log = LoggerFactory.getLogger(SomeDependentBean.class);
public void process(Exchange exchange) throws Exception {
log.info("This is: "+toString());
numOfInvocations++;
if (numOfInvocations!=1){
throw new IllegalStateException(numOfInvocations+"!=1");
} else {
log.info("OK");
}
}
}
Is there anything I can do in our application to change this behavior and use actual version of Apache Camel?
EDIT:
Removing tags camel-cdi and jboss-weld. I have created unit test, to simulate this situation without dependencies to camel-cdi and Weld. This test contains assertion to test JndiRegistry#lookup, which returns correct instance. According this test I believe, the issue is in bean component itself. Fails with version >=2.20.0 and passes with <=2.19.5
public class CamelDependentTest extends CamelTestSupport {
private Context context;
private JndiRegistry registry;
#Override
protected RoutesBuilder createRouteBuilder() throws Exception {
return new RouteBuilder() {
#Override
public void configure() throws Exception {
from("direct:in")
.to("bean:something?cache=false");
}
};
}
#Override
protected JndiRegistry createRegistry() throws Exception {
JndiRegistry registry = super.createRegistry();
registry.bind("something", new SomeDependentBean());
this.context = registry.getContext();
this.registry = registry;
return registry;
}
#Test
public void testFreshBeanInContext() throws Exception{
SomeDependentBean originalInstance = registry.lookup("something", SomeDependentBean.class);
template.sendBody("direct:in",null);
context.unbind("something");
context.bind("something", new SomeDependentBean()); //Bind new instance to Context
Assert.assertNotSame(registry.lookup("something"), originalInstance); //Passes, the issue is not in JndiRegistry.
template.sendBody("direct:in",null); //fails, uses cached instance of SameDependentBean
}
}
According CAMEL-12610 is Processor supposed to be singleton scope. This behavior was introduced in version 2.20.0. Do not implement Processor interface, instead annotate invokable method as #Handler.
Replace
#Named
public class SomeDependentBean implements Processor {
public void process(Exchange exchange) throws Exception {
}
}
with
#Named
public class SomeDependentBean {
#Handler
public void process(Exchange exchange) throws Exception {
}
}
If you cannot afford that as me, because it is breaking behavior for our app extensions, I have implemented simple component. This component have no caching and allows to invoke Processor directly from registry.
CdiEndpoint class
public class CdiEndpoint extends ProcessorEndpoint {
private String beanName;
protected CdiEndpoint(String endpointUri, Component component) {
super(endpointUri, component);
}
public void setBeanName(String beanName) {
this.beanName = beanName;
}
#Override
protected void onExchange(Exchange exchange) throws Exception {
Object target = getCamelContext().getRegistry().lookupByName(beanName);
Processor processor = getCamelContext().getTypeConverter().tryConvertTo(Processor.class, target);
if (processor != null){
processor.process(exchange);
} else {
throw new RuntimeException("CDI bean "+beanName+" not found");
}
}
}
CdiComponent class
public class CdiComponent extends DefaultComponent {
#Override
protected Endpoint createEndpoint(String uri, String remaining, Map<String, Object> parameters) throws Exception {
CdiEndpoint endpoint = new CdiEndpoint(uri, this);
endpoint.setBeanName(remaining);
return endpoint;
}
}
Usage
public void configure() throws Exception {
getContext().addComponent("cdi", new CdiComponent());
from("direct:in")
.to("cdi:something");
}

CamelTestSupport read placeholders from yml file

I am trying to test my Camel Routes using CamelTestSupport. I have my routes defined in a class like this
public class ActiveMqConfig{
#Bean
public RoutesBuilder route() {
return new SpringRouteBuilder() {
#Override
public void configure() throws Exception {
from("activemq:{{push.queue.name}}").to("bean:PushEventHandler?method=handlePushEvent");
}
};
}
}
And my test class look like this
#RunWith(SpringRunner.class)
public class AmqTest extends CamelTestSupport {
#Override
protected RoutesBuilder createRouteBuilder() throws Exception {
return new ActiveMqConfig().route();
}
#Override
protected Properties useOverridePropertiesWithPropertiesComponent() {
Properties properties = new Properties();
properties.put("pim2.push.queue.name", "pushevent");
return properties;
}
protected Boolean ignoreMissingLocationWithPropertiesComponent() {
return true;
}
#Mock
private PushEventHandler pushEventHandler;
#BeforeClass
public static void setUpClass() throws Exception {
BrokerService brokerSvc = new BrokerService();
brokerSvc.setBrokerName("TestBroker");
brokerSvc.addConnector("tcp://localhost:61616");
brokerSvc.setPersistent(false);
brokerSvc.setUseJmx(false);
brokerSvc.start();
}
#Override
protected JndiRegistry createRegistry() throws Exception {
JndiRegistry jndi = super.createRegistry();
MockitoAnnotations.initMocks(this);
jndi.bind("pushEventHandler", pushEventHandler);
return jndi;
}
#Test
public void testConfigure() throws Exception {
template.sendBody("activemq:pushevent", "HelloWorld!");
Thread.sleep(2000);
verify(pushEventHandler, times(1)).handlePushEvent(any());
}}
This is working perfectly fine. But I have to set the placeholder {{push.queue.name}} using useOverridePropertiesWithPropertiesComponent function. But I want it to be read from my .yml file.
I am not able to do it. Can someone suggest.
Thanks
Properties are typically read from .properties files. But you can write some code that read the yaml file in the useOverridePropertiesWithPropertiesComponent method and put them into the Properties instance which is returned.
Thank Claus.
I got it working by doing this
#Override
protected Properties useOverridePropertiesWithPropertiesComponent() {
YamlPropertySourceLoader loader = new YamlPropertySourceLoader();
try {
PropertySource<?> applicationYamlPropertySource = loader.load(
"properties", new ClassPathResource("application.yml"),null);
Map source = ((MapPropertySource) applicationYamlPropertySource).getSource();
Properties properties = new Properties();
properties.putAll(source);
return properties;
} catch (IOException e) {
LOG.error("Config file cannot be found.");
}
return null;
}

testng how to dynamically set groups from Factory?

Before I setup a test class like the code below:
1. the Factory and test Dataprovider both used excel as the dataprovider.
2. In the Factory dataprovider table, it has a list of url
3. Each time, it will find one of the url in the factory dataprovider table, and run the test in each test methods..
public class Test {
WebDriver driver;
private String hostName;
private String url;
#Factory(dataProvider = "xxxx global variables", dataProviderClass = xxxx.class)
public GetVariables(String hostName, String url) {
this.hostName = hostName;
this.url = url;
}
#BeforeMethod
#Parameters("browser")
public void start(String browser) throws Exception {
driver = new FirefoxDriver();
driver.get(url);
Thread.sleep(1000);
}
#Test(priority = 10, dataProvider = "dataprovider Test A", dataProviderClass = xxx.class)
public void TestA(Variable1,
Variable2,Variable3) throws Exception {
some test here...
}
#Test(priority = 20, dataProvider = "dataprovider Test B", dataProviderClass = xxx.class)
public void TestB(Variable1,
Variable2,Variable3)
throws Exception {
some test here...
}
#AfterMethod
public void tearDown() {
driver.quit();
}
Now I want to dynamically assign different group for each test for different url. I am thinking add a variable 'flag' in the #Factory dataprovider:
#Factory(dataProvider = "xxxx global variables", dataProviderClass = xxxx.class)
public GetVariables(String hostName, String url, String flag) {
this.hostName = hostName;
this.url = url;
this.flag = flag;
}
That when flag.equals("A"), it will only run test cases in test groups={"A"}.
When flag.equals("B"), it will only run test cases in test groups ={"B"},
When flag.equals("A,B"), it will only run test cases in test groups ={"A","B"}
Is there any way I can do that?
Thank you!
TestNG groups provides "flexibility in how you partition your tests" but it isn't for conditional test sets. For that you simply use plain old Java.
You can use inheritance or composition (I recommend the latter, see Item 16: Favor composition over inheritance from Effective Java).
Either way the general idea is the same: use a Factory to create your test class instances dynamically creating the appropriate class type with the appropriate test annotations and/or methods that you want to run.
Examples:
Inheritance
import org.testng.annotations.Factory;
import org.testng.annotations.Test;
public class DemoTest {
#Factory
public static Object[] createTests() {
return new Object[]{
new FlavorATest(),
new FlavorBTest(),
new FlavorABTest()
};
}
/**
* Base test class with code for both A-tests and B-tests.
*
* Note that none of these test methods are annotated as tests so that
* subclasses may pick which ones to annotate.
*/
public static abstract class BaseTest {
protected void testA() {
// test something specific to flavor A
}
protected void testB() {
// test something specific to flavor B
}
}
// extend base but only annotate A-tests
public static class FlavorATest extends BaseTest {
#Test
#Override
public void testA() {
super.testA();
}
}
// extend base but only annotate B-tests
public static class FlavorBTest extends BaseTest {
#Test
#Override
public void testB() {
super.testB();
}
}
// extend base and annotate both A-tests and B-tests
public static class FlavorABTest extends BaseTest {
#Test
#Override
public void testA() {
super.testA();
}
#Test
#Override
public void testB() {
super.testB();
}
}
}
Composition
import org.testng.annotations.Factory;
import org.testng.annotations.Test;
public class DemoTest {
#Factory
public static Object[] createTests() {
return new Object[]{
new FlavorATest(),
new FlavorBTest(),
new FlavorABTest()
};
}
private static void testA() {
// test something specific to flavor A
}
private static void testB() {
// test something specific to flavor B
}
// only create A-test methods and delegate to shared code above
public static class FlavorATest {
#Test
public void testA() {
DemoTest.testA();
}
}
// only create B-test methods and delegate to shared code above
public static class FlavorBTest {
#Test
public void testB() {
DemoTest.testB();
}
}
// create A-test and B-test methods and delegate to shared code above
public static class FlavorABTest {
#Test
public void testA() {
DemoTest.testA();
}
#Test
public void testB() {
DemoTest.testB();
}
}
}
Your factory methods won't be as simple as you'll need to use your "flag" from your test data to switch off of and create instances of the appropriate test classes.

Bidirectional communication from Camel to Vertx socket Server

I am trying to use Camel NettyComponent to communicate with a SocketServer written in Vert.x.
This is my server code:
public class NettyExampleServer {
public final Vertx vertx;
public static final Logger logger = LoggerFactory.getLogger(NettyExampleServer.class);
public static int LISTENING_PORT = 15692;
public NettyExampleServer(Vertx vertx) {
this.vertx = vertx;
}
private NetServer netServer;
private List<String> remoteAddresses = new CopyOnWriteArrayList<String>();
private final AtomicInteger disconnections = new AtomicInteger();
public int getDisconnections(){
return disconnections.get();
}
public List<String> getRemoteAddresses(){
return Collections.unmodifiableList(remoteAddresses);
}
public void run(){
netServer = vertx.createNetServer();
netServer.connectHandler(new Handler<NetSocket>() {
#Override
public void handle(final NetSocket socket) {
remoteAddresses.add(socket.remoteAddress().toString());
socket.closeHandler(new Handler<Void>() {
#Override
public void handle(Void event) {
disconnections.incrementAndGet();
}
});
socket.dataHandler(new Handler<Buffer>() {
#Override
public void handle(Buffer event) {
logger.info("I received {}",event);
socket.write("I am answering");
}
});
}
});
netServer.listen(LISTENING_PORT);
}
public void stop(){
netServer.close();
}
}
I tried to build a Route like the following:
public class NettyRouteBuilder extends RouteBuilder {
public static final String PRODUCER_BUS_NAME = "producerBus";
public static final String CONSUMER_BUS_NAME = "receiverBus";
private Processor processor = new Processor(){
#Override
public void process(Exchange exchange) throws Exception {
exchange.setPattern(ExchangePattern.InOut);
}
};
#Override
public void configure() throws Exception {
from("vertx:" + PRODUCER_BUS_NAME).process(processor).to("netty:tcp://localhost:"+ NettyExampleServer.LISTENING_PORT + "?textline=true&lazyChannelCreation=true&option.child.keepAlive=true").to("vertx:"+CONSUMER_BUS_NAME);
}
}
My tests shows that:
If I eliminate the processor on the route, the delivery succeed but there is no answer by the server
If I keep the processor, the data is delivered to the server but an exception raise because no data is received.
I have created a small project here: https://github.com/edmondo1984/netty-camel-vertx . How do I use Camel Netty Component to create a bidirectional route ?
To communicate Vertx and Camel the best tool is to use one of this:
Camel Vertex endpoint
Vertex Camel connector
You can find an example here
If you could or have another requeriments it is possible also to use a common connector like Netty on the both sides.

Resources